Article

2010-12-28 China-Japan-Koreas

U.S. not to redeploy tactical nukes in S. Korea

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2010-12-28 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views ] Top

#1 Wel-l-l, PEOPLES DAILY FORUM > A HUGE SLAP IN THE FACE OF CHINA'S MILITARY LEADERS [US ONI Report describing PLA assets as potential "sitting ducks"].

ONI REPORT also read = DESPITE IMPROVEMENTS, CHINA + CPLA HAVE GOT A long Long LONG L-O-N-G WAYS TO GO YET.

The comments of RUSS DEFENSE MINISTER SERDYUKOV dismissing the threat to Russia + USA from China's growng nuclear arsenal ADDS THE PROVERBIAL "INSULT-TO-INJURY"???

Posted by JosephMendiola 2010-12-28 00:22|| 2010-12-28 00:22|| Front Page Top

#2 Board of Directors of the New America Foundation.

Posted by Pappy 2010-12-28 01:22|| 2010-12-28 01:22|| Front Page Top

#3 I agree. We have nukes on subs and carriers, why the hell would we want to open up that can of political worms by adding tactical nukes? The South can't and won't use 'em and we have much better conventional options now than a tactical nuke. Hell, one MRLS battalion will do the work of a tactical nuke these days.

Posted by DarthVader 2010-12-28 11:43|| 2010-12-28 11:43|| Front Page Top

#4 Lemme play devil's advocate for a bit and throw out an off-the-wall argument.

Bringing nukes into a country and stationing them there is a long process. Getting nukes out of a country (vis a vis Turkey) is a long process. It implies there's going to be a long-term commitment to that country's defense.

Yes, there's nukes on a variety of US delivery platforms and perhaps they can be delivered in about an hour. The question then becomes: Would they be delivered when necessary?

Part of the South Korean government's request is theatrics, mostly for internal consumption. But I think that part is the South Korean government's concern of where US commitment stands.

Considering who the scholar represents, a better rephrasing of Mr. Lewis' comment would be 'the ~~South Korean public~~ U.S. left-leaning political elite "remains ambivalent about South Korea's close relationship with the United States" '.

Then again, that could be said on behalf of a lot of countries.

Posted by Pappy 2010-12-28 12:47|| 2010-12-28 12:47|| Front Page Top

#5 Doesn't matter about tactical nukes. The NORKS know that if they used nukes against the SKORS, Obama would respond with a UN resolution and a strongly worded letter. So much for deterrence. If I were the SKORS (or Japan or Taiwan) for that matter, I'd be rushing to produce my own nukes.

Posted by CincinnatusChili 2010-12-28 15:09|| 2010-12-28 15:09|| Front Page Top

#6 Japan could have nukes in 6 weeks, Taiwan in about 18 months. Not sure on the South Koreans.

Posted by Shieldwolf 2010-12-28 15:12|| 2010-12-28 15:12|| Front Page Top

#7 Taiwan oughta get crackin'. Bambi ain't coming to their rescue.

Posted by Hellfish 2010-12-28 21:39|| 2010-12-28 21:39|| Front Page Top

#8 Japan could have nukes in 6 weeks, Taiwan in about 18 months.

Not much good if the NorKs use a nuke. China could effectively crack the diplomatic whip on behalf of its client in less than an hour.

Posted by Pappy 2010-12-28 21:53|| 2010-12-28 21:53|| Front Page Top

00:01 twobyfour
00:01 USN,Ret
23:49 JosephMendiola
23:46 JosephMendiola
23:15 tu3031
23:01 trailing wife
22:36 Spock the Ruthless6200
22:28 trailing wife
22:11 JosephMendiola
22:08 Frank G
22:04 Pappy
21:59 trailing wife
21:57 Frank G
21:54 Old Patriot
21:54 Hellfish
21:53 Pappy
21:52 JosephMendiola
21:41 Frank G
21:40 tu3031
21:39 Hellfish
21:37 tu3031
21:35 JosephMendiola
21:16 JosephMendiola
21:12 tu3031